Apple Uses Machine Learning To Chronicle All the Bra Pics On Your iPhone (vice.com)

New submitter bumblebaetuna shares a report from Motherboard: It's already well known that iOS 11 included some advanced updates to the phone's artificial intelligence, and this includes improving the photo app's ability to identify and categorize what is in each of your photos. There are thousands of objects the phone can identify, ranging from "abacus" to "zucchini." Weirdly, despite not having categories for, say, "nude," or "underwear," there are multiple categories for bra: brassiere, bandeau, bandeaus, bra, bras, and brassieres. Searching for this folder in your photos app may reveal an unexpected surprise. Though there are some pretty archaic terms like "homburg," "habiliment," and "danseuse," the "bra" category is unusual compared to the other quotidian labels the app slaps on your photos, and is as risque as the terms get.

Comments

Maybe Apple has a dirty mind

[hyades1]

"Danseuse", mentioned in the summary and TFA, is French for a ballet dancer. Also, sometimes, a lady of negotiable virtue.

Re:Maybe Apple has a dirty mind

[TWX]

Everyone is of negotiable virtue.

For a scant few, the price is to serve a life-sentence.

Re:Maybe Apple has a dirty mind

[denisbergeron]

Danseuse, is also French for erotic female dancer... just saying !

Re:Maybe Apple has a dirty mind

[hyades1]

C'est vrai, mon ami!

Re:Maybe Apple has a dirty mind

[denisbergeron]

"Danseuse à gogo" is a very old expressin, like 1950 and it's more like a dancer of an old form of disco dance from that time. Danseuse is only dancer, but when they have no adjective, we, well I, think erotic dancer.

So that's what she's doing in there

[bobbied]

That's what Siri is doing in there, sorting my photos... She gives me the creeps....

archaic to some, not to others

[TWX]

A homburg hat might be obscure among the general population, but I would not be surprised if there's a disproportionate overlap between those that actually do know what a homburg hat is and have one featured in one's photos, and iPhone users that actually would seek to use these entirely unnecessary functions.

Re:archaic to some, not to others

[TheFakeTimCook]

A homburg hat might be obscure among the general population, but I would not be surprised if there's a disproportionate overlap between those that actually do know what a homburg hat is and have one featured in one's photos, and iPhone users that actually would seek to use these entirely unnecessary functions.

Keep in mind that one person's "Entirely Unnecessary" is another person's "The coolest thing EVAR!

The world is a different place when you're designing a PRODUCT for the masses, dumbass!

The interesting question

[Chuck Chunder]

Is how they arrived at the list of categories that it caters for. You'd think it would make sense to support terms that people commonly search for (which might explain "bras", but "Floppy disks"?)

Re:The interesting question

[apoc.famine]

Hey, we've all got our fetishes....

Re:The interesting question

[jrumney]

which might explain "bras", but "Floppy disks"

iOS autocorrect strikes again?

You got it.

[AndyKron]

I don't want my phone analyzing my pictures. Fuck Apple.

Re:You got it.

[Anonymous Coward]

so Im guessing you don't like Google as well? what the fuck do you think Google does? What an idiot.

Re:You got it.

[brantondaveperson]

Why not?

Re:You got it.

[Austerity Empowers]

I suspect he's not an Apple customer, so he really has nothing to worry about.

Re:You got it.

[TheFakeTimCook]

I don't want my phone analyzing my pictures. Fuck Apple.

Then there's a whole universe of Android phones.

Those would NEVER analyze your data, right? (rollseyes)

Can it identify foods?

[Anonymous Coward]

Can it identify a hotdog?

Hotdog
Not hotdog
Eggplant

Undies

[tquasar]

What's up brah? https://www.urbandictionary.co... Also, there's a comet diving towards the sun. https://www.space.com/33651-co...

Outsourcing

[atisss]

I'm sure outsourcing to India would be cheaper, perhaps even gain profits

Well, no, not generally

[fyngyrz]

a bra doesn't reveal any more than any bikini top does.

I suspect you're just not very familiar with nice bras. There are other interesting variations on bra design as well. Many of them are quite sensual. Go to google, make sure the nanny safe search is off, enter "transparent lace bra" as the search term, and then click on "Images."

Very few sightings of bikinis will look like that.

And then there are the metal / chain bras. Kill the safesearch, use "chain bra OR bralette", search, the click images.

You can search "cupless bra" as well for something a bit different.

There are definitely some interesting looks out there that leave most bikinis in the dust.

If you're really lucky, you'll hook up with someone who knows to wear them, too. :)

Re:Well, no, not generally

[ColdWetDog]

You're looking at Slashdot where children can see it?

Have you *no* shame?

Re:Well, no, not generally

[apoc.famine]

Quick! Soothe their eyes! Cutest Disney Animals evaaaaa! Click NOOOW! CLICK NOOOWWW!.

Re:Well, no, not generally

[serviscope_minor]

Is that still a working link? I heard it got taken down years ago. Not gonna click because I value my eyes.

Re:Well, no, not generally

[apoc.famine]

No idea. I wasn't clicking it!

Re: Well, no, not generally

[Brockmire]

So you're mad that your kids think you're creepy? Bad news, they already did.

over the shoulder boulder holder

[Trax3001BBS]

Not an expressed term

Negotiations

[fyngyrz]

Q: Lady, would you sleep with me for a million dollars?

A: Yes, I would.

Q: Would you sleep with me for a dollar?

A: What do you think I am?!?!

... We've already established what you are, madam, now we're just haggling over the price.

Google do just that since 2 last years

[denisbergeron]

in their photo apps and cloud photo album... I use it like every time I try to find one of my (10!)^256! pictures

Re:Google do just that since 2 last years

[RhettLivingston]

Google does not do this. Google does not use end-to-end encryption in storing your data. This allows them to analyze your photos in the cloud. In return for opening your entire photo world up to them (and anyone who can pry it out of them legally or illegally), they do give you some nice features. I enjoy the assistant-generated collages, animations, and movies.

Apple, on the other hand, stores photos using end-to-end encryption. Their cloud servers cannot analyze them. They are performing this analysis on the device. And the results of the analysis are kept under the same security as the photos.

Google may start doing photo analysis on the Pixel 2 with its new AI chip soon, but they are not now. When they do, it is still unlikely that they will give up on being able to access your photos while they are on their server.

Re:Google do just that since 2 last years

[Waccoon]

Apple, on the other hand, stores photos using end-to-end encryption.

One problem I have with this is that the default passcode is limited to a 6-digit number (digits only). You can change the passcode settings to enable alphanumerics, but the default is just digits.

Given this default lack of entropy, and the fact that the secret keys in the hardware are known to Apple, it's trivial for the company to break the encryption on the vast majority of devices if they really want to. I'm not suggesting they're secretly complying with the government, but they probably do mine the "easy" information for statistical reasons just like every other company.

Re:Google do just that since 2 last years

[AmiMoJo]

Google does not use end-to-end encryption in storing your data.

They do. I suspect you don't know what end-to-end encryption is. It just means that the connection between the two endpoints is encrypted, and they do use that (HTTPS) when storing your photos in the cloud if you enabled cloud sync.

Also, the image recognition features are done on the phone. They do additional stuff in the cloud like the collages and auto-photoshopping, but the image recognition stuff works just fine without cloud sync enabled. Same with Google Translate (with databases downloaded for offline operation). I have not tested Lens in airplane mode yet.

The "AI" chip in the Pixel 2 is nothing of the sort. It's an image processing accelerator, a parallel DSP processor suited to image manipulation tasks.

Re:Google do just that since 2 last years

[mzakieg]

Google does not do this. Google does not use end-to-end encryption in storing your data. This allows them to analyze your photos in the cloud. In return for opening your entire photo world up to them (and anyone who can pry it out of them legally or illegally), they do give you some nice features. I enjoy the assistant-generated collages, animations, and movies.

Apple, on the other hand, stores photos using end-to-end encryption. Their cloud servers cannot analyze them. They are performing this analysis on the device. And the results of the analysis are kept under the same security as the photos.

Google may start doing photo analysis on the Pixel 2 with its new AI chip soon, but they are not now. When they do, it is still unlikely that they will give up on being able to access your photos while they are on their server.

Something interesting http://www.mo5talf.com/ Internet news, software, applications, games, blogger, profit from the Internet

Re:Google do just that since 2 last years

[Darinbob]

My phone only has 5 categories, I was surprised when I realized it could do this. I don't upload photos to google, and disabled that setting. So a bit annoying that it's going to waste my phone's already miniscule battery life on something like this.

And I do turn off indexing, face tagging, etc. I used to think my computer had a virus because it was always accessing the hard drive even when I wasn't touching the computer, until I realized it was the indexing turned on. Still this happens sometimes with everything shut down, but in a creepy way. I'll see the computer busy and open up task viewer and suddenly it stops and is quiet again (exactly what smart malware would do).

Re:Google do just that since 2 last years

[TheFakeTimCook]

Apple, on the other hand, stores photos using end-to-end encryption.

One problem I have with this is that the default passcode is limited to a 6-digit number (digits only). You can change the passcode settings to enable alphanumerics, but the default is just digits.

Given this default lack of entropy, and the fact that the secret keys in the hardware are known to Apple, it's trivial for the company to break the encryption on the vast majority of devices if they really want to. I'm not suggesting they're secretly complying with the government, but they probably do mine the "easy" information for statistical reasons just like every other company.

So they allow people that don't really care to keep their passcode simple, and those who are more sensitive to security to have a Horse Stapler Passphrase.

Explain to me why CHOICE isn't a Good Thing(tm)?

Re:Google do just that since 2 last years

[Waccoon]

Explain to me why CHOICE isn't a Good Thing(tm)?

Strawman.

The point is that the default setting is designed to keep entropy low, giving people a false sense of security. Some user know this and can "enable" stronger passwords, but most people don't know this, which is why I pointed it out (and apparently got downvoted for simply doing so). Information is harmful, kids.

Re:Google do just that since 2 last years

[TheFakeTimCook]

Explain to me why CHOICE isn't a Good Thing(tm)?

Strawman.

The point is that the default setting is designed to keep entropy low, giving people a false sense of security. Some user know this and can "enable" stronger passwords, but most people don't know this, which is why I pointed it out (and apparently got downvoted for simply doing so). Information is harmful, kids.

No. Your entire premise is a Strawman argument.

Re:Google do just that since 2 last years

[Waccoon]

No, the argument is that if I want a simple, easy-to-remember passcode, I can decide that for myself. The phone should not be limiting me to a simple passcode at setup, and make me jump through hoops to "unlock" stronger passcodes and have to change it later. That's idiotic and very obviously counterproductive for security.

Re:Google do just that since 2 last years

[TheFakeTimCook]

No, the argument is that if I want a simple, easy-to-remember passcode, I can decide that for myself. The phone should not be limiting me to a simple passcode at setup, and make me jump through hoops to "unlock" stronger passcodes and have to change it later. That's idiotic and very obviously counterproductive for security.

Bullshit.

If you consider flipping a switch in the Settings App to be "Jumping through hoops", then I pity you for feeling put-upon to have to jump through hoops like "pressing Accept on your phone just to answer a call", or "entering your PIN to access your bank website AFTER you already logged-in with your username and password", right?

I know who you are: You're that guy that makes me create a password with so many special features that it becomes TOTALLY un-remember-able, and so I end up HAVING to write it down somewhere; which, guess what? TOTALLY defeats the purpose of a "secure password".

Actually, these seem like very similar "hoops":

Android:

https://www.howtogeek.com/2531...

Apple:

  Seems like the option to decide what passcode strength you want is right there when you enter your passcode. How much less of a "hoop" do you want???

https://www.macworld.co.uk/how...

TL;dr

You're demonstrably an idiot Apple Hater. Nothing more.

It's "on your phone"

[RhettLivingston]

The article points to Apple's support site that states clearly "When you search your photos, all of the face recognition and scene and object detection are done completely on your device."

It is great that the AI is finally moving off the cloud and onto the device. This is where it belongs. We should be highly praising any software that implements personal assistance features like this locally. They have the potential of eventually supporting personal clouds made up of nothing but my devices with cradle to grave encryption.

Apple's provision of end-to-end encryption of user data stored in their cloud forces this architecture. They don't have the ability to decrypt your photos stored in iCloud and analyze them on a cloud server. So they have to do it on the device. Kudos to Apple for taking the high road instead of the easy road.

We should have no concerns whatsoever about what it is capable of recognizing. Ultimately, I want it to be capable of accurately recognizing anything in the pictures. Why not? Both the analysis and the photos are stored with the same security. If an attacker can get the analysis, then they can just skip that and get the photos instead.

The important thing is secure storage of both the picture and any analysis of it and that neither ever leaves my device pool at any point in time without explicit intentional action on my part such as "sharing" a photo. Apple is almost all of the way there. I'd like to have the further option of pulling the encrypted cloud storage out of the picture and just have my devices automatically synchronize to each other.

Re: It's "on your phone"

[RhettLivingston]

I personally want to see the long-predicted age of AI assistants arrive. I want them to evolve to be as good as the best executive assistants out there. If I ask my assistant to buy a gift for my wife, I expect it to be as good as the best executive assistant would be at picking just the right gift for my wife. In order for that to happen, it needs to know a lot of personal stuff about me (to know what kinds of things I might actually buy someone) and about my wife. Without information, an assistant is worthless to me. We've entrusted human assistants with this kind of information, and, frankly, it is probably easier to hack a human assistant then it is to hack iPhone's current protections.

Anyway, assistants need data, and I want assistants.

If a picture would be compromising or something that you wouldn't let your executive assistant see, don't take it.

Re:It's "on your phone"

[tlhIngan]

The article points to Apple's support site that states clearly "When you search your photos, all of the face recognition and scene and object detection are done completely on your device."

It is great that the AI is finally moving off the cloud and onto the device. This is where it belongs. We should be highly praising any software that implements personal assistance features like this locally. They have the potential of eventually supporting personal clouds made up of nothing but my devices with cradle to grave encryption.

Yes, Tim Cook has been saying this for at least a year now - all the recognition happens on your phone or on your computer. It's why if you have the same photos, but multiple devices, they will come up with different conclusions. They run independently of each other.

I suppose they could also share system state through iCloud, again encrypted so Apple can't get at the information, but it's easier to show it's all on-device when multiple devices come to different conclusions.

And remember, Apple doesn't want that information. Every bit of data Apple stores or has on you is data that's subject to government inquiry. It costs Apple money to look up that information, so if they can avoid storing it, they will. It's why iCloud backups of iDevices never include passwords - Apple cannot provide what they never had. (To backup passwords requires iTunes and an encrypted backup - Apple doesn't want it, so you have to do local backups).

The downside is of course, it's poorer. Google, Microsoft, etc., can run powerful servers on their huge data sets for learning and categorizing. All Apple can do is what they have in public data sets and what each device learns from each user. It's a far smaller data set, and thus it's classification will be less good. It's why Siri has more issues than Google Assistant or Cortana - the Siri team can do AI only on what limited data you agreed to, while Google and Microsoft can run it against their entire data set (especially since Alphabet's privacy policy allows sharing of data among all Alphabet companies)..

Re:It's "on your phone"

[AmiMoJo]

And to be fair, Google does the same thing. Image recognition on the device, allowing natural language search. Optional cloud storage.

Re:It's "on your phone"

[Darinbob]

Yes, it sorts photos, for the small number of people who care about it. But it's not AI, it's a very specific use of image processing hardware. AI would be adaptable, it would let you sort by a category that you actually care about. But I certainly would not want to waste my battery life on such a feature. It's a friggin phone, maybe expend some resources on making the sound better for voices.

Re:It's "on your phone"

[RhettLivingston]

The human brain is a lot of separate little neural nets only a fraction of which get used at a time depending on what is necessary. Granted, the way the neural networks being used for object recognition now work is poor. They need to break up the steps into many little ones like the brain does instead of training one big network to go all the way from pixels to objects. But, AI will appear someday, possibly even unexpectedly, when we start putting thousands of these little neural networks together with other layers of networks acting as crowd supervisors. The tech Apple is using to perform the object recognition is a component of AI.

And, yes, right now it is sort of a phone. Personally, making calls or sending messages is less than 5% of my phone use. And, no, I don't play any games on my phone.

Eventually, I expect smartphones to drop the displays, keep other sensors and a small speaker, and change to using AR glasses or any other display around as the display output as well as automatically using the most appropriate devices to talk to you at any given time. They will stay in your pocket or we'll come up with other more secure ways to carry them since they will never have to be pulled out for use.

Basically, they are going to evolve somewhat full circle to being an even more personal PC. They will be able to charge or receive power without leaving our person. And they will be able to utilize nearby processing resources to do heavier processing when necessary (and trusted). With a vastly lower latency, usually less than a millisecond, your "PC" will utilize processing power in your home more like distributed processing than cloud computing. When you come home, it will join more directly into a distributed intelligence that is your true assistant.

Re: It's "on your phone"

[RhettLivingston]

True, though most have at some time at least asked for suggestions from friends. I can't remember everything my spouse has said they like in the past year. But an assistant could do so flawlessly and analyze emotional context to give me a summary with predictions of satisfaction. I'd be negligent not to ask it for a ranked summary and take it into consideration.

Would you consult your spouse's sibling, best-friend, parent, your kids?

I'd temper this a bit to say thinking about, consulting, and choosing is important.

I expect assistants to be more like cyber extensions of us, not like a friend. It will know more about me than any person can know - likely even more than I know myself.

We already have much help in our lives with procuring a present. We aren't making the gifts ourselves in most instances. Even if we are, it would be very rare indeed that we aren't using things made by others in doing that making. We aren't even usually buying direct from others who did the making. We are instead benefitting from distribution networks and stores that do the advertising to get the suggestions in our heads.

We always think of these progressions as something that changes everything fundamentally when in fact they are just another step in a process that has been going on since the dawn of man. It's relative, not absolute.

Re:Can iOS users turn off this categorizing?

[Joce640k]

Does anybody really think this info won't be "anonymized" and sent to Apple for further processing?

Re:Vibrating Fingers... Bra Pics...

[ColdWetDog]

Dark? Why dark? How can you see a bra in the dark?

Re:no more revealing than a bikini top

[Anonymous Coward]

Even if it does reveal everything, so what? The photos are already on the device, it's not like the phone is downloading porn on its own. Another pointless controversy.

Re:Can iOS users turn off this categorizing?

[ColdWetDog]

Why would they do that? They can get their own god damned bra pictures. It's not like it's hard these days (so to speak).

Re:no more revealing than a bikini top

[Anonymous Coward]

What? In the washer (and then the dryer)?

apple is sexiest

[Osgeld]

what about the bro? a bet there's a large percentage of slashdotter's that feel the same way

Re:apple is sexiest

[93 Escort Wagon]

Manzierre!

Re:It's all, um, research. Yeah, research.

[PPH]

The boobies too.

Re:Can iOS users turn off this categorizing?

[AHuxley]

Re: Why would they do that?

To better understand whats in demand, selling, trending over a wide population. Color, size, changes in demand for materials, style.
Is average demand for a more conservative fashion? Different colors? Are consumers buying new product lines quicker or not? Are consumers spending less and keeping a few trusted brands that are better value for longer?
That can all be used to support ads, push out new trends. To find out if movies or celebrities using brands or product ranges had any influence over buying patterns.

If product placement worked, try it again. Did a movie or celebrity fail to change buying habits and set a new trend?
Did average consumers rush out to buy into a new line of products and a brand due to promotion?

Real time sales data and market research in to size, style, household spending can only do so much.
It helps a brand escape groupthink https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/... or its own feedback from limited US elite coast marketing experiments.

Buy a dslr.

[AHuxley]

For now your average compact camera, SLR is not been evil.
Take your own images, enjoy them and keep them well away from the cloud.

Re: Can iOS users turn off this categorizing?

[Monster_user]

Wait, does that mean Apple is entering the fashion bra market?

Re: Can iOS users turn off this categorizing?

[AHuxley]

Its all ok, its "anonymized" :) Then monetized...

F*ck these "amazing" new iOS 11 features

[hcs_$reboot]

Seriously. Did the last 11.1 update on my iphone. What's the first and main improvement of that update that Apple brags about? "70 new emoji"! Meanwhile many bugs are left unaddressed and my gps is still dancing around some location which is not where I am. Really, Apple, get the work done right first and try to inject some new features after that has been successfully done.

Re:no more revealing than a bikini top

[Austerity Empowers]

I would put it the other way. If you want to quickly identify any photo's that may have questionable material and make them go away, searching on these sorts of terms might be useful.

I don't think this is an invasion of privacy... it's cataloging what you already have in there. But it may help you get through thousands of naughty photos quickly.

Re:iCloud

[Big Hairy Ian]

Isn't this exactly the same kind of tech that M$ said they were developing and then abandoned in Windows Vista? Looks like Apple beat them to it :)

Re:Can iOS users turn off this categorizing?

[the_B0fh]

Apple already said they don't do this. Their income from advertising is so low that it's laughable. They don't want to make money from ads or selling information about you.

Re:Vibrating Fingers... Bra Pics...

[Neuronwelder]

and also I'm sure, sooner or later they will come out with one that glows.

Re:F*ck these "amazing" new iOS 11 features

[Darinbob]

I think 3000 less emoji would be a feature that would motivate me to consider using that product.
I turn off GPS, I'm annoying that it still knows where I am and that it keeps asking me all the time if I want to turn GPS back on.

Re:Trannies

[TheFakeTimCook]

iPhone trannies love bras.

And Android Trannies prefer...?

Re:Can iOS users turn off this categorizing?

[TheFakeTimCook]

Re: Why would they do that?

To better understand whats in demand, selling, trending over a wide population. Color, size, changes in demand for materials, style.

Is average demand for a more conservative fashion? Different colors? Are consumers buying new product lines quicker or not? Are consumers spending less and keeping a few trusted brands that are better value for longer?

That can all be used to support ads, push out new trends. To find out if movies or celebrities using brands or product ranges had any influence over buying patterns.

If product placement worked, try it again. Did a movie or celebrity fail to change buying habits and set a new trend?

Did average consumers rush out to buy into a new line of products and a brand due to promotion?

Real time sales data and market research in to size, style, household spending can only do so much.

It helps a brand escape groupthink https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/... or its own feedback from limited US elite coast marketing experiments.

You must be confusing Apple with Google.

How's that Tinfoil Hat fitting these days? Need another layer on there?

Re:Can iOS users turn off this categorizing?

[TheFakeTimCook]

Apple already said they don't do this. Their income from advertising is so low that it's laughable. They don't want to make money from ads or selling information about you.

Exactly!

Apple ditched its "targeted advertising" campaign, iAds, well over a year ago, due to poor performance (in fact, it was a huge bust (hehe)).

But I wouldn't blame Slashdotters for not knowing that; I don't think that fact ever made it to a Slashdot Article, for SOME strange reason...